Mr. Speaker, obviously the government House leader and the government are setting the tone right off the bat. We saw that in the response to the Speech from the Throne when the new member poked the Bloc in the eye. We are now seeing this procedural wrangling. We know the government House leader is an expert at this because he has had many years of practice in opposition. Perhaps he is time warping to those days.
The subamendment proposed by the government House leader is inconsistent with the main motion. I would direct you, Mr. Speaker, to Beauchesne's citation 580(2) which says:
A subamendment must attempt to explain the substance of the amendment and may not substitute an entirely new proposal.
The amendment by logical thought processes would indicate that the motion we are bringing forward is not currently in place and is not happening. That is why we are asking for it to be immediately put into place.
The government House leader's subamendment, by logical processes, would infer that this process is in place and should just keep going. The two are logically inconsistent with each other. It is a substantive change to the motion and should be ruled directly out of order.